[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Carl Childress
Quote:
Originally posted by GarthB
[About a ball lodged in the glove and Carl's ruling/illustration on the play:] It isn't FED's. They haven't issued one. And accordiong to Carl it isn't an interp at all. I then began to wonder if other BRD "interpretations" were also not interpretations. Never got an answer.
|
Well, now we have an answer. According to Tim Stevens, B. Elliott Hopkins has ruled that a ball lodged in the glove may NOT be thrown for an out. Instead, it is immediately dead and each runner, including the batter runner, is awarded two bases measured from the time of the pitch.
Tim called to say that he remembered such a ruling from a play that happened in California a few years ago. Apparently, the IHAA interpreter remembered the same thing. But, according to Elliott....
As I emailed Peter at the early stage of this thread: "I wouldn't be surprised if FED rules contrary to Tim. It's dangerous to rely on common sense when dealing with FED."
Tim's honesty and loyalty are unquestionable. I have no doubt that his original ruling was the one he preferred, but being the good soldier, he will follow Elliot, as should all FED umpires.
It's good to know that we won't have to deal with the play as an
illustration of language any more.
[Edited by GarthB on Sep 9th, 2004 at 01:32 AM]